Not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. This is yet another cog in the interesting machine currently under construction in this country, that will someday eliminate all excuses for any and all AA subculture or AA behavior that is not part of the American mainstream. CONTENT OF YOUR CHARACTER = no more baggy pants or bling, either become a part of mainstream America or be left behind. Quit dressing like an overgrown child and be a man. CONTENT OF YOUR CHARACTER = work hard like everybody else, have strong families, be married, care about education, etc. CONTENT OF YOUR CHARACTER = put down the guns, put down the crack pipe, stop acting irresponsibly. CONTENT OF YOUR CHARACTER = voting in a black president means anything is now possible in this country, there is no longer any built-in excuse for failure or non-participation or lack of inclusion, no more crutches to fall back on, either

Some are getting the message and getting with the program, others are a little slow on the uptake.

All I am saying is that, if I or someone in my family was engaged in criminal behavior, or if I felt that criminal behavior in my community was perfectly okay, then I would certainly want to vote for a judge who also had a criminal family. Seems to have touched a nerve with some people, when you point that out to them.

shaladaga, to answer your question seriously, about why certain people in the metro area regularly ride against traffic. In many instances they ride against traffic because they do not want someone to come up behind them with a gun. It is cultural and it is very real thing to them, particularly in the segment of the community that sells or uses drugs, or is involved in street crime. Also it is so that they can see police coming before the police see them, although the police will often try and change this by driving the wrong way down one way streets. Most of those who participated in the naked bike ride were actually of the law-abiding and conscientious type of riders.

Yes, Cao will definitely be out soon -- when the census comes in for 2010, and the 2nd Congressional district is redrawn in 2012, the gerrymandered majority African American district for Louisiana will be moved from New Orleans to the area around Baton Rouge.

Hmm truthisn't it. Maybe there are "no suggestions of other activity" or perp walks, because these people actually ARE investigated and the feds don't FIND anything?

Kinda like Una Anderson...ya'll were all hooping and hollering about that one...yup, Pampy from in his jail cell said she took a bribe, Una denied she took a bribe, but ya'll were having a field day with that one... you all cheered and jeered and said she was GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY....then Jimmie Woods and Alvin Richard (both black) came forward and denied that they paid the bribe to her husband...Feds look into it...funny how ya'll didn't say a peep about Jimmie Woods or Alvin Richard, ya'll dropped picking on Una like a hot potato. Now you just want to keep talking about Sidney this, Sidney that.

Hmmm you have no facts to base your argument on so you attack me personally with insults. Love it.

You keep on crying about how unfair it is, the real truth is, we all enjoy watching you display your poor NOPS education here..."Why aren't the Feds investigating Vitter!!!!" OK, lemme look in the ol' book here, truth -- whoops, seeing a prostitute is uh, NOT A FEDERAL CHARGE.

Since you can't talk about the facts, now is the part where you come back with the comment to me about have my sheets come back from the cleaners yet. Go on, I'm waiting -- you know you wanna!!!

James Brown was also arrested for assault and battery, driving under the influence of smoking PCP, stealing cars as a juvenile and battering women on multiple occasions. He was accused of forcible rape, and was also married to a woman who was legally married to another man. That's a heckuva person to be taking your advice from, Jarvis.

lesbianpower, it's funny that your friend would say that -- because the very government she works for, says that blacks have a MUCH higher rate of domestic violence than whites or Hispanics

Check out this quote from the U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
Bureau of justice Statistics
2000 Report "Intimate Partner Violence"

"Overall, blacks were victimized by intimate partners at
significantly higher rates than persons of any other race
between 1993 and 1998. Black females experienced intimate
partner violence at a rate 35% higher than that of white
females, and about 22 times the rate of women of other races.
Black males experienced intimate partner violence at a rate
about 62% higher than that of white males and about 22 times the
rate of men of other races.

No difference in intimate partner victimization rates between
Hispanic and non-Hispanic persons emerged, regardless of gender."

Kind of interesting, huh? Black females experience domestic violence at a rate 22 times higher than other races. Hmmmm. I guess domestic violence cuts across all skin colors and classes, but I guess it cuts across one of them 22 times more often than others!!!! LOL

Domestic violence is a routine and everyday occurrence in the black community. It's perfectly normal to them, just another day in the life. There is no need to even be surprised by any of this -- I'm certainly not. The supposedly successful and affluent ones are just like the poor and illiterate ones -- violence and aggression is a cultural thing with them. Violence is how they solve problems and handle disagreements. The black community sees nothing wrong with this type of violence, that is why you will find that they are not the LEAST bit concerned about someone in a supposed position of leadership behaving like this. It is normal to them, they won't denounce it or see anything wrong with it. Just you watch as they will probably even stick up for him if this ever goes to trial (which it probably won't).

This is just yet another of Jarvis's racist hack columns, that will get quietly pulled from the Times Picayune website and purged from the archives before you know it. Just like the column where Jarvis attacked Douglas Brinkley for criticizing Nagin (now pulled from the Times Picayune archives, no longer available) and where Brinkley turned out later to be right; just like the column where Jarvis attacked Shelly Midura for her support of the Inspector General (pulled from the Times Picayune archives, no longer available, see a pattern here?) where DeBerry put his foot in his mouth and even possibly exposed the Picayune to a potential libel suit by saying that Midura "didn't last long at the State Department" implying she was somehow a problem there, when in fact she was there ten years. So we all know that on more than one occasion DeBerry's sloppy, racist Op-Ed columns with their wild inaccuracies and distorted half-truths have turned out to be professionally embarrassing to the Picayune, when later facts reveal that DeBerry got it WRONG, ie his columns defending Bill Jefferson before his indictment came down. And when the facts all come out in this email flap eventually, this column is going to be absolutely no different.

Remember these words, folks, from the recall effort against Cao: "We don't care what the Constitution says!" That comment (from a minister, no less) shows you right there, exactly what these people think and where their mentality is at. It is time for us to take these ministers' words at face value, "we don't care what the Constitution says," and for us to acknowledge and admit openly that a certain segment of the population has nothing but contempt for American values, laws, and principles. That is William Jefferson's position.

Remember the "honorable explanation," that he has not offered publicly so far? Well, here is what it really is folks: to their minds, in their consciences, there is NOTHING WRONG with an elected official taking a bribe! It is "honorable!" If white people can speak to each other about blacks in secret code, well so can black people speak to each other in code, and this is what he's saying with his words. It's HONORABLE to take a bribe.

It's simple -- once you realize that criminality is a part of their psyche, and they simply don't have the same sense of morality as the rest of America does, it all makes sense. You cannot expect them to adhere to American standards of behavior or virtue, because to them there is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with being criminal. It's who they are, and what they do. And that is why these people in his district voted for him again and again and again, that is what they want and that is why he is so popular. Behind closed doors, they feel no disgust or shame at his criminal activity, they only feel whispered anger that he got caught.

Why would anyone vote for a candidate that did not represent their viewpoint? No, we need to be realistic about this, and understand who these people are and what they stand for. It's NOT about race, it's about the secret and not-so-secret contempt for the law which these people have, that is part of the fabric of their subculture of society. It's time to stop tiptoeing around the issue, and address it head on: let's be honest about who these people are and what they stand for. "We don't care what the Constitution says." That says it all right there.

You think this was bad, calling that woman in Walmart a "chick," what a horrible offensive and racist term that is, it curdles the blood of anyone who marched and lived through the civil rights movement, LOL. Chick! OMG! What a racist word! Just wait until we get the emails where Stacy refers to Nagin as "C Ray" or even just the insulting "him." Calling the mayor "him," you can just see the seething hate and the racist conspiracy in that derogatory term, LOL. I bet they will be marching in the streets over this terrible injustice!!!!! "This chick." Stacey Head should resign for using such inflammatory language, LOL.

This bill is incredibly stupid, the US Supreme Court has already ruled that you cannot punish the child (who is being fed/clothed/sheltered by welfare) for the poor behavior or misconduct of the parent. This was the same exact Supreme Court ruling in the late '60s that said that parents did not have to be married or live under the same roof. If you want to drug test welfare recipients, or make them in any way accountable for themselves, or behave like productive members of society, then you need to focus your efforts on changing that court ruling. Otherwise representatives like LaBruzzo are just blowing smoke out their $%#$%$#.

Irishjean, Irisheyes, trying to explain the law to these people is a waste of time. They can't understand the difference between federal and non-federal crimes, just like they can't understand the fact that there is no such thing in the constitution as a recall election for Congressman Cao. You have to understand the mentality you are dealing with here. Remember the minister who said about the Cao recall, "We don't care what the constitution says!" Well, take a good eyeball at that quote, because that is one of them speaking his mind, "telling truth to power," and expressing EXACTLY what they and their constituents think about the laws and principles of this country. Straight from the horse's mouth, as it were. They simply don't care about any of it!

You can argue with them all day long about federal vs. state stuff, that most people learn in 8th grade civics class, but it is a waste of time, because they don't care what the law says -- they're just mad because one of their own got flagrantly caught with his hand in the cookie jar, so they will now want to talk about Vitter and the Northshore and Greg Meffert, instead. They will want to talk about ANYTHING else under the sun, but not about the open and flagrant contempt for the laws, espoused by their own elected officials, and their own continued support for those officials. It's a cultural thing.

This is an indictment not a conviction, he is not going anywhere just yet. You will not see his supporters who elected him on these forums talking publicly about it, but in private behind closed doors they will talk in hushed tones about the "conspiracy" going on, and when push comes to shove they will back him all the way, and even vote for him again if given the chance. Besides, most of the electorate that supports him, do not think that it is wrong for an elected person to take bribes or hand out privileges. That is actually what they see the role of government as being. To them there is nothing ethically or morally wrong about it. THAT is, in fact, the "honorable explanation" that has not been publicly spoken, in another recent case! You have to keep this in mind when you are discussing these type of politicians. Once you understand that principle, their behavior and attitudes make perfect sense.